You know how you rent an apartment out to some random dude, right? And you leave $102,000 lying around in the place, you know? In one of those big, you know ... boxes, right? And you know how the dude takes it and just spends it? Yeah?

85blue:There are collectors.However the value of the whiskey is based on prominence.There is no indication that owner was aware the items existed before being found.The owner can not testify to the condition of the collection.Although DNA samples show Saunders handled the bottles, the prominence would have been lost had bottles been opened previously.The presumed value of the prominent items can never be authenticated.Therefore it has no value.Saunders may be charged with drinking the contents of the bottles.Opened whiskey from 1912 has no value other than the original purchase price.Which I'm guessing is less than $1.I'm not a lawyer but would that defense work?

the colectors market doesnt work like that

it is like saying my 1884 NO mint Morgan silver dollar is only worth a dollar because it's face value is 1 dollar

Oldiron_79:GAT_00: Why the fark would a bottle of whiskey be worth $2100?

I'm guessing novelty, because Whiskey doesn't age in the bottle, only in the barrel.

Or they are just retarded and think it ages in the bottle like wine

In the thread about the hundred year old whisky found in Antarctica, someone pointed out that it is interesting not because it ages in the bottle, but because it is preserved and has historical value. The whisky can show what alcohol was like in the day and, according to this one poster, its recipe could be reverse engineered in order to duplicate 1800s or early 1900s whisky or whatever year it was